Will the Washington Post Give Equal Time?

No one wants to lose a son. I'm sure Paul E. Schroeder didn't.

The Washington Post offered Mr. Schroeder a pulpit to express his grief.

Just as they covered Cindy Sheehan's every move.

But not every parent of a fallen solider grieves like Paul, and to be balanced the Washington Post should show the "other side" a 'voice' as well.

If for no other reason than for respect.

How about a letter from the parents who support the war and honor the sacrifice that their children made.

How about a pulpit for Ronald R. Griffin, who lost a son and who said: My son died in Iraq--and it was not in vain.

Or some of these parents like Judy Childers who said back in August of 2005 said of Cindy Sheehan:

"Childers wants to let the nation know that not all mothers of fallen soldiers side with Sheehan.

"There needs to be another voice," she said. "The media has put the spotlight on her."

Childers is not alone. In fact, her words are echoed - sometimes even verbatim - by other area mothers who have lost their sons to war.

Of the seven Montana soldiers and six Wyoming soldiers who have died in the conflict, five have ties to the Eastern Montana/Northern Wyoming region.

Many of the parents spoke about a cause greater than their own personal loss.

To describe their feelings about Sheehan, they use words like disgust, disgrace, dishonor and sadness, yet they all support her right to protest.

"I feel she is disgracing her son's memory," Childers said."

The point is that the grief of a parent is hallowed, but no more or less hallowed than the loss of other parents. The MSM seems all too ready to present only "one side" of grief - the antiwar side. That needs to change.